Rationale
The Red Hartebeest, although historically reduced from overhunting, is now common within the assessment region, having been reintroduced into a number of formal and private protected areas across its range. The wildlife ranching industry also harbours a large number of animals on privately owned game farms and reserves. The population is widespread on formally protected areas and private land and has increased significantly on formally protected areas at least over the past three generations (1992â2015). Globally, Red Hartebeest is the most numerous subspecies (c. 130,000 animals) and is increasing. Within the assessment region, there are at least 14,849 mature animals (assuming a 70% mature population structure) on formally protected areas (with three subpopulations >,000 mature individuals in Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, Golden Gate Highlands National Park and Karoo National Park), which increases to 38,511 mature animals by including private lands (2013/14 counts). Thus, the Least Concern listing remains. While there are no major threats, local threats, such as poaching, may cause declines outside protected areas. However, the effects of the wildlife industry on this species should be monitored, and hybridisation between Red Hartebeest, other hartebeest subspecies and other antelope species should be carefully regulated (for example, there should be no movement from the private sector into formally protected areas without genetic testing). This species is a key species for sustainable, wildlife-based rural economies and incentives should be put in place to conserve this species as wild and free-roaming herds on private land.
Lichtensteinâs Hartebeest is Not Evaluated within the assessment region, as there is much uncertainty over whether the subspecies was ever resident in both Kruger National Park (KNP) and northern KwaZulu-Natal Province (KZN) (for example, Pongola Nature Reserve). While they have been reintroduced into both KNP and private conservancies in the Lowveld, their numbers are currently very low within the assessment region (although their numbers were estimated to be 82,000 globally in 2008), probably comprising fewer than 50 individuals. Once further evidence has been produced to confirm or reject its historical residency in the assessment region, this subspecies should be reassessed.
Regional population effects: Most of the population is fragmented through fencing. However, there is some local dispersal in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park between South Africa and Botswana depending on rainfall and local climatic variability.
Distribution
Red Hartebeest occur throughout much of southern Africa (and marginally into Angola near the Namibian border) and, although much reduced by European colonists, their range is now expanding again as they have been reintroduced into many protected areas and private game farms (and widely introduced outside their former range) (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016); for example, in Namibia (Skinner & Chimimba 2005). The bulk of the population in Botswana is in the southwest of the country in the Kalahari but they occur widely south of the Okavango (Skinner & Chimimba 2005). While Red Hartebeest historically occurred in the western lowlands of Lesotho, intense hunting and depredation have eradicated them from this area (Lynch 1994). They are widespread throughout South Africa extending eastwards from the Western Cape coastal areas along the coast and into the hinterland into the semiarid and savannah regions as well as Highveld grasslands, but the natural range does not extend into the Lowveld of Mpumalanga and Limpopo and northern KZN. It is widespread in protected areas throughout its range, and there is an increasing tendency for this species to be introduced onto private conservation areas. Currently, the subspecies now occurs in all provinces, which is echoed historically as numerous writers documented their occurrence throughout the Northern, Western and Eastern Cape provinces and in parts of the Free State, North West, Gauteng, KZN and Limpopo provinces (Handley 1961; Skinner & Chimimba 2005). Extra-limital introductions have, however, occurred in parts of the eastern Limpopo as well as Mpumalanga (where they are currently present in three provincial protected areas; J. Eksteen pers. comm. 2015) using animals from Namibia (Skinner & Chimimba 2005). They have also been introduced into Swaziland (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016). The Red Hartebeest as a subspecies (A. b. caama) naturally occurs in South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe.
The only part of their former range from which they were not entirely eliminated was the Northern Cape and presently herds move across the Botswana border onto farms in the province (Skinner & Chimimba 2005), which is corroborated by reports from the North West Province where the Moshita region harbours a naturally occurring, free-roaming subpopulation that probably originated from Botswana (Buijs 2010; Power 2014).
Lichtensteinâs Hartebeest formerly occurred widely in the miombo woodlands of south-central Africa, but now occur mainly in wildlife areas in Tanzania, Mozambique and Zambia; they are extinct in Burundi (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016). Within the assessment region, they were probably present in low numbers in the Lowveld and northern KNP and KZN (du Plessis 1969; Milstein 1989; Skinner & Chimimba 2005), but were perhaps mistaken for Tsessebe (Damaliscus lunatus lunatus) in southern KNP (Penzhorn 1985). In 1985, 18 hartebeest were reintroduced from Malawi to KNP, a further 91 captive-bred individuals were released into northern KNP during 1990â1994, and 31 to the southern regions in 1994, but there are no further planned translocations into KNP (S. Ferreira pers. comm. 2014). In KZN, there were reports of hartebeest in Pongola as early as 1895 (Skinner & Chimimba 2005). Being ecologically unsuitable for Red Hartebeest, it is reasonable to assume the subspecies was Lichtensteinâs. They have also been reintroduced to some private reserves in the Lowveld. However, there is debate around whether this subspecies ever truly occurred in the assessment region or whether they were occasional visitors from their core range. For example, it was excluded from the previous assessment (Friedmann & Daly 2004). Supporting the exclusion, several older texts do not mention the subspecies as occurring in South Africa (Roberts 1951; Rautenbach 1982; Meester et al. 1986). More research is necessary to determine whether this subspecies was, or should be, native to the assessment region.
Population trend
Trend
Globally, East (1999) estimated the total population of all hartebeest at about 362,000 animals (including Lichtenstein's), the majority of which are Red Hartebeest, estimated to number about 130,000 animals on both private and formally protected land. The population is widespread and thriving within the assessment region. On protected areas alone, there are a minimum observed number of 21,213 animals in 70 reserves (2013/14 counts), with the largest subpopulations occurring in the South African side of Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park (1,925 animals in the wet season of 2012; Ellis & Herbst 2013), Golden Gate Highlands National Park (1,646 animals in 2016; Bissett et al. 2016b), and Karoo National Park (1,650 animals in 2015; Gaylard et al. 2016). Some large private wildlife reserves (such as Tswalu Kalahari Reserve and Khamab Kalahari Reserve) also contain subpopulations in excess of 1,000 animals. Including animals on private lands increased the population estimate to a minimum number of 55,016 animals (2013/14 counts) on 726 properties. This yields a total estimated mature population size (assuming 70% mature population structure) of 14,849â38,511 animals in 2013/14.
Generation length has been calculated as 7.8 years (Pacifici et al. 2013), which yields a three-generation window of 23.5 years (1992â2015). All available subpopulation trends on protected areas indicate a positive growth rate over three generations (Peinke & Gibisela 2014; for example, Nel 2015; Bissett et al. 2016a, 2016b; Ferreira et al. 2016; Gaylard et al. 2016). This subspecies generally thrives in protected areas. For example, following the incorporation of QwaQwa National Park into Golden Gate Highlands National Park in 2008 (increasing the size of the protected area to 327 km2), Red Hartebeest increased from 346 in 2002 to 1,646 in 2016 (Bissett et al. 2016b).
There were suspected to be around 50 Lichtensteinâs Hartebeest in KNP in 2009 (Ferreira et al. 2013), but they now are virtually locally extinct in KNP with perhaps one individual remaining (S. Ferreira pers. comm. 2014).
Threats
Globally, as the bushmeat trade escalates out of control (Lindsey et al. 2013), many hartebeest populations are being hunted to extinction (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016). However, unlike the rest of Africa, the Red Hartebeest population within the assessment region is well protected and most subpopulations are stable or increasing. Poaching is a localised threat; for example, on Borakalalo National Park, North West Province (Nel 2015).
Ongoing threats to this subspecies are habitat loss and habitat degradation. Ongoing habitat conversion from agriculture, livestock farming and commercial development make habitat less available or less suitable for future reintroductions into such areas. The distributions of most hartebeest subspecies are likely to become increasingly fragmented until they are confined to those areas where there is effective control of poaching and encroachment by livestock and settlement (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016). However, the Songimvelo subpopulation showed an increasing trend despite an increase in competition from livestock; in the same period that the Sable (Hippotragus niger niger) subpopulation declined (J. Eksteen unpubl. data).
Climate change may make the western parts of South Africa drier in the coming years, and Red Hartebeest are particularly susceptible to drought. For example, many carcasses were found on Molopo Nature Reserve in North West Province following drought conditions (Nel 2015).
This subspecies is suspected to be hybridised with other hartebeest subspecies and with Blesbok (Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi), Bontebok (D. p. pygargus) and Tsessebe (Damaliscus lunatus lunatus) on private lands. This may make certain subpopulations ineligible for Red List assessment and may threaten the genetic integrity of the subspecies overall. This practise, while currently not common, should be disincentivised.
Uses and trade
This species is used in live animal trading at game auctions, and has a subsistence value as bushmeat or for recreational biltong hunters as they have high-quality meat (Gosling & Capellini 2013). The hartebeest also has national and international value as a species suitable for trophy hunting. This appears to have had no negative effect on the population as its value as a trophy animal ensures an increase in numbers due to reintroductions to game farms. Hunting quotas also benefit communal areas in some regions (Buijs 2010). There is also some captive breeding of hartebeest (IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2016), but this is limited.
Wildlife ranching and the private sector have generally had a positive effect on this species as it has been widely reintroduced onto private properties within its natural distribution range. Most populations on wildlife ranches are free-roaming. Ranches are generally a few hundred hectares in the central and northern parts of the country to several thousand hectares in the more arid areas of the Northern Cape. Some of the very large privately owned reserves in this area have populations in access of 1,000 individuals and therefore contribute significantly to the regional population. Due to its value (medium priced) and popularity as a trophy hunting animal, it is a popular species to have amongst game farm owners. Captive breeding of this species is not common and currently hybrids or colour variants do not feature in the live sale market.
Conservation
Red Hartebeest are well protected across their range within the assessment region. No direct interventions are currently necessary for this subspecies. However, continued protected area expansion to connect fragmented subpopulations and restrictions on the introduction of extra-limital subspecies/species, especially on private lands, will increase the long-term resilience of the population.
Recommendations for land managers and practitioners- Drop internal fences to form conservancies so as to encourage greater movement within the landscape and thus less habitat degradation at the local scale.
Research priorities:Research is currently being conducted by Eastern Cape Parks and Tourism Agency on movement and feeding ecology of the subpopulation in Mkambati Nature Reserve. UNISAâs College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences is conducting some research on the physiology of the subspecies in the Northern Cape.
Research priorities include:- Quantifying the severity of bushmeat poaching.
- Quantifying vulnerability to climate change.
- Genetic work on wild subpopulations (Kalahari, Namibia and other regions) to establish if any genetically distinct subpopulations exist.
Encouraged citizen actions:- Landowners should create conservancies for this species and engage local stakeholders to create sustainable, wildlife-based rural economies.
- Report sightings of free-roaming herds outside private lands or protected areas on virtual museum platforms (for example, iSpot and MammalMAP).
